Airport body scanners can cause DNA damage?

[Malsua]

You would stand out like a bright light when going through the detector. LOL

Yeah, but it wouldn't know who I was.

[vector7]

Airport Test New Scanners

Added On January 7, 2010

[Malsua]

I say NO. 'eff 'em. I don't give a crap if someone sees me naked. That's not the point.

They're effectively stripping naked anyone who goes through that scanner...offending MILLIONS to avoid offending muslims. Offend the fucking muslims first, if that doesn't work, then get back around to me. I'm not the problem.

[American Patriot]

I agree with you Mal. I'm not the problem.

The problem with walking through a scanner with such a device is that, yes they WOULD know you right away. They are looking at the scanners, and can see you standing there. Duh. lol

[vector7]

Real ID will now have no problem getting everyone signed up after this preventable DHS failure.

Here's a refresher... DHS extends REAL ID deadline to the end of 2009

Brilliant Timing...

Israel’s New Human-Less Security

January 7, 2010 - 9:34 AM | by: Reena Ninan

Israel's Ben-Gurion International Airport in Tel Aviv is the first in the world to begin using a new system that allows passengers to perform security checks by themselves.

The system is called Unipass. When passengers register they're given a smart card with all their security information encrypted.



When they arrive at the airport they swipe their Unipass and then their passport. A camera scans their face using face recognition technology. The computer then asks several security questions that security officials usually ask. If the passenger's identity can not be determined then they're asked to scan their fingerprint.

The system is meant to decrease the amount of time passengers spend in security lines. Security officials are still on hand and will step in as needed.

The pilot program is being tested on El Al frequent flier members who sign-up in advance. In the first two days since registration began more than 540 people have registered.

"My dream is for this to be a cooperation with several airports so travelers will arrive to multiple airports easily," said Oded Bender, CEO Bender Technologies, whose company created the new system along with Israel Airports Authority.

Airport officials say Continental Airlines is expected to begin using the program at Ben-Gurion in the coming months.

[vector7]

Crack New Scanner Looks for Bombs Inside Body Cavities

• By David Hambling
• January 8, 2010

The “underpants bomber” has renewed calls for new and more invasive security measures. Already, there’s a push to install scanners that show travelers’ naked bodies through clothing, using either millimeter wave or backscatter X-ray imaging. But even those scanners might not have caught the terrorist who nearly brought down Northwest flight 253.

That’s why one company is trumpeting a sensor that can supposedly “detect substances such as explosive materials … hidden inside or outside of the human body.” First step: Actually build a human-sized machine.

There has already been one report of a suicide bomber carrying explosives internally. Many sources, including the BBC, carried an early report suggesting that Abdullah Hassan Al Aseeri adopted the new tactic of “carrying explosives in his anal cavity” for an attack in September. The target, a Saudi prince, survived, but Aseeri was reportedly blown in half by the blast. Later reports suggest the explosives were actually sewn into his underwear, but security experts believe there is a real danger of “internally carried” bombs, a technique used for years by drug smugglers.

Nesch, a company based in Crown Point, Indiana, may have a solution. It’s called diffraction-enhanced X-ray imaging or DEXI, which employs proprietary diffraction enhanced imaging and multiple image radiography (.pdf).

Rather than simply shining X-rays through the subject and looking at the amount that passes through (like a conventional X-ray machine), DEXI analyzes the X-rays that are scattered or refracted by soft tissue or other low-density material. Conventional X-rays show little more than the skeleton, but the new technique can reveal far more, which makes it useful for both medical and security applications.

“Our patented technology can detect substances such as explosive materials, narcotics, and low-density plastics hidden inside or outside of the human body,” company CEO Ivan Nesch claims. DEXI allows explosives to create contrast, he adds, so it would be able to detect both the underpants bomber and the shoe bomber before they boarded.

The image above shows how a conventional radiograph does not detect two packets of “illegal materials” concealed in soft tissue, while they are plainly visible in when DEXI technology is used.

The process of taking the images, analyzing them, and then recognizing substances of interest — such as explosives — can be automated. Alerts issued can be computer-generated. Security staff would simply have to get passengers in and out of the imaging unit.

“The initial expected throughput is approximately one to two passengers a minute,” according to Nesch. “Once installed and tested in real applications, the throughput will be increased.”

Nesch has already demonstrated the technology with a unit originally designed for imaging small animals. The next stage is a human-sized unit, which is being “finalized for extensive testing.” Nesch plans to start taking orders for the new unitin March this year.

Of course, X-ray scanners always bring up a concern over the level of radiation involved. One of Nesch’s corporate slogans is “Less radiation, more information,” as DEXI uses significantly less radiation than other approaches.

“It is far less than what a passenger would receive simply by flying on an airplane across the United States,” says Nesch. “Passengers who are imaged using DEXI security will be exposed to approximately 50 times less radiation than that of a conventional radiograph. ”

There is likely to be a ready market for the new technology. Although an X-ray might be seen as more intrusive than an image of the outside of your body, it may be less controversial. In Britain, plans for “naked body” scanners may run into trouble because they break British child pornography laws: Creating “indecent” images of children is illegal. Those scans may also offend the modesty of some Muslims.

DEXI may be able to see into your body cavities, but it may be less obnoxious than some of the alternatives.
Photo: Nesch LLC

[vector7]

Airport Body Scanners Violate the Teachings of Islam, Says Muslim Group

Thursday, February 11, 2010
By Susan Jones, Senior Editor

(CNSNews.com) - A group of Muslim scholars says it supports airline safety, but it is"deeply concerned" about the use of airport scanners that show nude images of the human body.

“The Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) emphasizes that a general and public use of such scanners is against the teachings of Islam, natural law and all religions and cultures that stand for decency and modesty,” the group said in a Feb. 10 statement posted at Islam Online.

"It is a violation of clear Islamic teachings that men or women be seen naked by other men and women," FCNA explained. The group noted that Islam emphasizes modesty, considering it part of the faith. "The Qur'an has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts" and to be modest in their dress.

While exceptions can be made in cases of "extreme necessity," FCNA indicated that passenger body scans do not rise to that level.

FCNA is asking for changes in scanner software so the machines will produce only body outlines. In the meantime, the group says Muslim travelers should choose pat-down searches over scanner images – in cases where searches are necessary.

The Fiqh Council of North America is an affiliate of the Islamic Society of North America, which advises and educates its members and officials “on matters related to the application of Shari’ah (Islamic law) in their individual and collective lives in the North American environment.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations also issued a news release on Wednesday, endorsing FCNA's statement on the use of body scanners.

[American Patriot]

Science TSA Worker Assaults Boss After Body Scanner Reveals Genitalia
Jason Mick (Blog) - May 7, 2010 1:50 PM

Don't make fun of TSA employee Rolando Negin's small junk, or he will beat you with a club. (Source: MSNBC)

President Obama has pledged hundreds of millions of dollars to pepper airports with the scanners, which have been shown in independent tests not to accurately detect plastic, powder, liquid weapons, or explosives. (Source: AP)




One worker is now in jail after assaulting a co-worker who teased him about his small genitalia

Rolando Negrin, 44, had a pretty good life including a steady job with the Transportation Security Administration. However, when he stepped into a full body scanner during a training session and it revealed him to have rather small genitalia, he quickly became the butt of his supervisor's jokes.

Filled with rage at the insults to his manhood, Negrin confronted his boss in the airport parking lot, armed with a police baton. He struck the man on the arm and back. A police report describes, "[Negrin] then told victim to kneel down and say 'your sorry'. Victim stated he was in fear and complied with [Negrin]."

Surprisingly, Negrin made no attempt to flee following the attack. He showed up at work the next day, acting as if nothing had happened. He was promptly arrested. He was booked into the Miami-Dade jail. He was wearing his blue TSA shirt at the time of his arrest.

The incident raises serious questions about the full body scanners that the Obama administrationis looking to spend millions of dollars in taxpayer money to roll out at airports across the country.

Homeland Security and TSA officials, as well as the scanner manufacturers have previously claimed that the scanners blur private parts. The incident clearly indicates that if these capabilities are present, they aren't on in at least some of the scanners -- a serious privacy concern.

Beyond the privacy concerns, there's also concern over the efficacy of the new scanners. British experts say that the scanners are virtually useless at detecting low density substances like chemical powders or liquids, and would be unlikely to detect plastic weapons.

Despite these concerns the U.S. and British governments are charging ahead with plans to roll out the controversial devices. It looks likely that the U.S. may soon implement a no-scan-no-fly policy, much like Britain.

[Malsua]

Wouldn't it be ironic if this man's small dick prevented us from getting a big dicking by the TSA?

[American Patriot]

wouldn't it be ironic if this man's small dick prevented us from getting a big dicking by the tsa?

lmao!

[vector7]

Now that everyone's acclimated to the naked scanners...time to turn up the juice.

RadPRO SecurPASS from Virtual Imaging

Published 16 June 2010

As worries about security increase, more venues require employees, customers, and visitors to pass through security scans; the scanning machines at the growing number of security check-points must meet two criteria: they should be able to detect a wide variety of materials and objects, and should do so at the lowest radiation dose possible; Virtual Imaging, a wholly owned subsidiary of Canon U.S.A., Inc., says its RadPRO SecurPASS meets these two criteria



Image generated by the RadPRO SecurPASS // Source: Virtual Imaging

The definition of what constitutes a dangerous material changes with the context and circumstances. A liquid which you will not give a second look to at home becomes a potential bomb material when carried on board. Commonplace materials such as copper wire or a pair of scissors become potential weapons when smuggled into a prison.

As worries about security increase and concerns with safety grow, more and more venues want to know — and more and more often, are required by law to know — what employees, customers, and visitors bring with them. The “visit” may not always be voluntary, as when defendant enters a court room, or a prisoner returns from a visit with his family in the visitation room.

This requirement by more and more venues of learning more about what employees, customers, or visitors bring with them — on or inside their bodies — must be balanced against the potential risk to health of exposure to radiation.
Screening technologies

Two types of X-ray scanning systems currently exist for security screening of individuals: backscatter systems and transmission systems.


Backscatter systems. With backscatter systems, the X-rays do not penetrate to depths much beyond the surface of the individual, so these systems are useful for imaging objects hidden under clothing, but are not useful for detecting objects hidden in body cavities. Backscatter systems are currently being used in the United States by the Customs Service and by several prisons for interdiction of drugs, weapons, and contraband.


A typical scan lasts about eight seconds and results in an effective dose of approximately 0.03 microsievert (μSv) to the individual.


Transmission systems. With transmission systems, the X-rays traverse through the body, similarly to a medical X-ray, so that objects that have been swallowed or hidden in body cavities may be visible. At least one model of a transmission scanning system is currently used outside the United States to screen workers exiting mines (for example, diamond mines) and at customs checkpoints in lieu of invasive body-cavity inspection.


Subjects being scanned move through the beam in approximately eight seconds and the effective dose per scan is on the order of 0.25 to 2.0 μSv.


Other technologies. Presently, there are also security scanners for the inspection of trucks, sea containers, train cars, or other cargo containers that use either gamma rays emitted by a radionuclide (for example, 137Cs or 60Co) or machine-generated radiation (for example, X-rays or neutrons). These systems are not intended to expose human

beings intentionally, but stowaways hiding inside the container or vehicle being inspected can be exposed.
Screening systems that do not utilize ionizing radiation are also available, and the following types are rapidly evolving: trace-chemical detection devices, millimeter-wave holographic imagers, dielectric portals, ultrasound imagers, and quadrupole resonance analyzers. Such devices should be evaluated as alternatives to systems that utilize ionizing radiation.
Virtual Imaging’s RadPRO SecurPASS

Virtual Imaging says that the patented technology behind its RadPRO SecurPASS — a transmission system developed by a company in Belarus — meets the two important criteria of machines built to screen for security:

• the machine must be versatile, able to detect a wide variety of materials
• the radiation dose required must be low enough so as not to pose health risks for the individuals being screened

These features make RadPRO SecurPASS suitable for scanning for all kinds of materials, making it suitable for airports, prisons, border crossings, and government buildings. The technology allows security personnel to detect both metallic and non-metallic items; minimize the need for physical searches; enhance privacy by not revealing skin surface or fine anatomical detail; and do all this while using very low radiation dosage for single inspection.

The company notes that these features make its technology suitable for a variety of applications:

• Civil security: airports, seaports, railways, bus stations
• Border security: customs, police
• Prison security: guards, prisoners, visitors, staff
• High level security: nuclear power plants, military facilities, embassies
• VIP protection
• Diamond mines (special model), gold ores refining and processing plants, concentrates and precious stones/metals processing plants

This low dose X-ray scanning system detects all types of dangerous or illegal substances such as liquid explosives, drugs, copper wires, plastics, and more. In the context of securing a prison, RadPRO SecurPASS is able to image prosthetics to identify hidden narcotics, weapons, contraband (makeup, medication, electronic devices, sharp objects, sporting goods, guns/firearms, tools, martial arts/self defense items, explosive/flammable materials, disabling chemicals, food/drinks) and any other objects that could be considered as dangerous.
The scanner makes it possible to detect drugs, precious stones, and metals either concealed under clothing or swallowed or hidden in the anatomical cavities of the human body may be seen (for example, drugs in condoms) at harmless levels for the inspected person.

Radiation dosage
As we pass through more and more screening machines — at airports, courts, government buildings, sport events, concerts, and more — worries grow about the health effects of the cumulative radiation we absorb at all these security check-points. It is thus useful to

consider radiation, and how RadPRO SecurPASS measures up in this regard.
Radiation is measured in microsievert (μSv):

• μSv = 0.01 mrem, so that 10 μSv = 1 mrem
• mSv = 100 mrem, so that 100 mSv = 10 rem

The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) has been asked by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to prepare a report on radiation and safety. NCRP has adopted measurements developed by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), which has approved a standard for scanning systems using X rays. NCRP and ANSI recommended that the effective dose per scan should be 0.1 μSv or less.

NCRP, for the purpose of radiation protection, recommended that:

• There should be two categories of ionizing radiation devices used for scanning humans for security screening purposes, general-use systems and limited-use systems.
• An effective dose of 0.1 μSv (or less) per scan is the basic criterion for distinguishing between the two categories. Both categories of systems should meet the recommended administrative control for a member of the public of 0.25 mSv (or less) effective dose per year for a single source or set of sources under one control (typically, “under one control” would refer to the use of scanning systems at one or more security checkpoints at a given venue)

General-use systems. General-use systems would be used mostly without regard to the number of individuals scanned or the number of scans per individual in a year, and should adhere to an effective dose of 0.1 μSv or less per scan. These systems would be appropriate for screening all members of the general public passing through a checkpoint, provided that the implementing agency has established the justification for such a screening procedure. The checkpoint in question is generally a security venue, and no attempt would be made (for the purpose of radiation protection) to limit the screening only to a selected portion of those seeking passage.

Limited-use systems. Limited-use systems would be used with discretion in terms of the number of individuals scanned and the number of scans per individual in a year, and would include all ionizing radiation scanning systems that require effective doses per scan greater than 0.1 μSv and less than or equal to 10 μSv per scan. At 10 μSv per scan, an effective dose of 0.25 mSv would be reached after only 25 scans.

These systems include scanning devices that exceed an effective dose of 0.1 μSv per scan, but the scanning device should not exceed 10 μSv per scan. In addition, the total effective dose for any individual should be 0.25 mSv or less in a year from limited-use systems used at a single venue.

RadPRO SecurPASS and radiation doses
The company says that the dose an scanned individual is exposed to is less than 0.25 μSv per scan. Here are some effective radiation dosages for comparison:

• One scan by the SecurePass LD = < 0.25 μSv
• 30 minutes of exposure to naturally occurring background radiation in Cornwall in the United Kingdom or Denver, Colorado = 0.25 μSv
• 4g of Brazil nuts = 0.25 μSv
• Single dental X-ray = 5 μSv
• X-ray tomography of the brain = 50,000 μSv (max), 10,000 μSv (min)
• Dental radiography = 5,000 μSv (max), 100 μSv (min)
• Chest radiography = 400 μSv (max), 100 μSv (min)
• Exposure during the flight by aircraft, flight duration:
• London-New York, 7.30 h = 37 μSv
• New York - Los Angeles, 6.15 h = 24 μSv
• Paris - Washington, 8.00 h = 41 μSv
• London - Rome, 2.30 h = 12.3 μSv
• Natural background radiation (24 hours) = 2.7 μSv -13 μSv

[American Patriot]

You know, next they will be TAXING us for the free medical examinations they are giving us......

[vector7]

Something you're not telling us? TSA workers to wear monitoring devices to test if scanners have dangerous levels of radiation

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 10:45 PM on 16th January 2012

• Comments (10)

Airport security officers are to be monitored for exposure to dangerous levels of radiation from the controversial scanners which are used to screen passengers before flights.

The Transport Security Administration's decision to give radiation-measuring devices to security officers in 100 U.S. airports comes after years spent dismissing claims that the scanners pose any health threat.

Security workers have long-complained that they were not being properly informed about the health risks by the TSA, and the federal agency's decision for further study only confirms their fears.


Exposure: Security workers have long-complained that they were not being properly informed about the health risks by the TSA

The machines have provoked health concerns about excessive radiation exposure since 2004 when a TSA study said that there were a handful of dangerous machines but then never removed the faulty ones.

Due to a lack of transparency during the tests, the fears continued to lurk among workers as the machines were used more and more as the years went on.

'We don't think the agency is sharing enough information,' said
'Radiation just invokes a lot of fear,' security worker spokesman Milly Rodriguez.told USA Today in 2010.

More...

• White House threatens that it won't support cyber piracy bill if it stifles internet freedom
• New York schools to play 'big brother' and track movements of kids in order to fight obesity

Initially deployed at dozens of airports to thwart attacks on the U.S. aviation system- which has continued to be a prime target of Al Qaeda militants- the radiation machines are at upwards of one hundred airports now.

Since the poor results in the 2004 study, the TSA has worked hard to stress that the machines are better-run and not dangerous.

‘The latest reports confirm previous testing and show that every backscatter unit currently used for passenger screening in U.S. airports is operating well within applicable national safety standards,’ said TSA spokesman Nicholas Kimball in May after the latest round of tests.

Now, the TSA has ordered government vendors to produce dosimeters- wearable devices that measure radiation levels for security workers at over 100 airports across the country.


Examined: Airport security officers are now going to be monitored for exposure to dangerous levels of radiation by the controversial scanners

In total, there are about 486 full-body scanners in 78 airports in the U.S., of which 247 are so-called backscatter machines. They expose a person to about 0.0025 millirem of radiation.

The chosen airports- or even how those airports will be decided upon- have not been announced.

Test results released by TSA in March showed some anomalies, such as missing data or calculation errors unrelated to safety. The agency ordered new tests for the scanners as well as other X-ray equipment used to screen baggage that had problematic reports.

The machines cannot produce more than 0.005 millirem per scan, according to TSA. In comparison, a chest X-ray will expose someone to 10 millirem of radiation and the maximum recommended exposure to radiation from man-made sources is 100 millirem per year, according to TSA.


Scanning for trouble: The machines have been deployed at airports to thwart attacks on the U.S. aviation system- a prime target of al Qaeda militants

The May figures show a significant improvement in radiation levels as the TSA grew to adapt to their new scanners.

In 2003 and 2004, a national study found that six of 281 examined machines had radiation levels that violated national laws. After announcing such a disturbing finding, however, they did little to quell the workers fears as they did not identify which were the six dangerous machines.

'We continuously test out technology to ensure it is safe for both passengers and our officers and post all results to our website,' said TSA spokesman Nico Melendez.